Pages

August 5, 2008

Ortiz Feels "Click" In Wrist

David Ortiz says he felt a click in his left wrist during his ninth-inning at-bat against Joakim Soria last night:

My last at-bat, it kind of pulled back a little bit. You feel that click and you get a little concerned about it.

During the weekend series against Oakland, Ortiz was shaking his wrist a little bit after some swings.

Dustin Pedroia has now hit in 25 straight road games (49-for-110, .445), the longest streak in club history since 1913 (Tris Speaker, 29). ... Mike Lowell will rejoin the team tonight, but it's unclear whether he'll be able to play. ... Jon Lester was named American League Pitcher of the Month for July.

68 comments:

The "click" is not necessarily reason for alarm, if it didn't hurt. Sheath problems often result in a chronic "click" but it doesn't really affect the integrity of the wrist---you just get used to it. Or it just stops. I am told there have been other baseball players who had to get used to the "click" without their performance suffering.

And my own click doesn't interfere with my lifing a beer can to my mouth, thank god.

The fact is that "clicking" itself is not a problem, is not unusual, and shouldn't interfere with hitting. Just like who hits behind a batter doesn't affect his hitting, unless he convinces himself that it does.

But by all means, believe that it's a sure sign of impdending doom if you want to.

Ortiz also said it pulled somewhat. I'm concerned. I think we can do well without Ortiz, but it's difficult to imagine getting to the World Series without him.

But maybe that's just force of habit by now.

The Yankees are not making the playoffs anyway

I really began to have doubts during their winning streak. But I think some of that was the ease of their schedule. Their acquisitions really don't worry me that much, and I'm beginning to believe again that they'll stay home in October. That would be sweet.

What's mostly bothering me is that I'm tired of seeing this good hitting team not hit with men on, this good pitching team not make key pitches, and all these strange losses in games the Sox should have won.

What is secondarily bothering me is reflexively snarky and insulting comments to my posts any time I raise any interpretation that varies from the mean. But I'm getting used to it....TOO used to it, apparently, as I now see that Laura's comment in fact preceeded mine. I mistakenly took it as a gratuitous swipe.

"Us" is the right answer; the Yankees are going down anyway. But I don't understand projecting problems that are pure speculation when there are so many others---the offense, Varitek (Did anyone else hear the KC radio team extoll Tek as "still a great clutch hitter"? Am I missing something, or is that one virtue that Jason has never had, even when he was an offensive factor?) Lowell's hip, Ellsbury's decline, Crisp's mediocrity, the mystery bullpen---that are right in front of us every day.

What is secondarily bothering me is reflexively snarky and insulting comments to my posts any time I raise any interpretation that varies from the mean.

On August 2 (10:04 AM), you referred to this entire blog as an "emotionally-charged pro-Manny enclave". You called us "deluded" and "beyond all logic". You called us "conspiracy buffs" who are "clearly" under "mass-hypnosis".

Yesterday (1:08 PM), you said the comments of various members (including me, obviously) sometimes "reminds [you] of a cult". You called it "strange" and "kind of scary". You called our opinions "absurd", "really ridiculous" and "bizarre".

And you are saying WE are at fault for "reflexively snarky and insulting comments"?

At the beginning of the Monday post, you mentioned the "nastiness" that has been directed at you when you post your opinion.

I wouldn't say Papi's wrist situation is pure speculation... he's lost two months to it, and it's now clicking and pulling and what not. And he hasn't exactly mashed since getting back from the DL (263/356/395, 751 OPS).BTW, while looking for this on B-R, I saw his 07 ALDS numbers again... 714/846/1.571, 2.417 OPS. Good times.

Please show us examples of snarky and insulting comments that have been directed at you.

Not disagreements. Snark and insults.

No one else on this blog drenches their posts with sarcasm and condescension as you do, Jack. No one else insults the intelligence of other commenters as you do.

Yet all the while you insist you are being insulted. And not only is it snark - it's "reflexive" snark - a knee-jerk reaction, unthinking, not used in the service of a difference of opinion, but used as an attack on you personally.

Lowell's hip, Ellsbury's decline, Crisp's mediocrity, the mystery bullpen---that are right in front of us every day.

I think Papi's wrist is right in front of us every day, too. It's cost him a big part of his season already and seems to be not right yet. It's at least as much of a concern as Lowell's hip, if not more.

Tim, if everybody shuts up, there won't be much of a blog, will there?

What I was thinking. I'll just "shut up" and let l-girl do my commenting for me!

But, Jack, and I say this as a new person here so realize I'm not so familiar with how things normally run...

It has seemed to me that you've been reacting to things that aren't necessarily aimed at you, or taking them in a more strident tone than they're being said, and it's clearly not making you enjoy life more to say the least. I don't know what to say about that except that if you thought anything I wrote was aimed at you, it wasn't. (I reserve my snark for sportswriters.)

Oh, heavens, l-girl, I responded before I saw the next comment starting:

I'm sorry if some people don't like arguing,

I'm just totally not hitting the right tone in my comments and I apologize.

Personally, I've nothing against argument. (This is what I was, unsuccessfully, trying to say by "for appropriately chosen interpretations of "shut up".)

Gah. Now I totally can't formulate what I wanted to say.

I'd like to read Jack's comments. He has interesting things to say, whether I agree or not. The interesting things have been often buried in complaints about how he's being treated, or about the tone of the posts, or something. That's too bad. I wish I knew something useful to say here...

Ehh, I really couldn't care less what anyone else does. Personally, I prefer to shut the hell up and enjoy the baseball games without fighting with other posters about (what I perceive to be) insignificant crap. If that's your cup of tea, go for it. I'm not stopping anyone. I should have rephrased my first post to "What I plan to do" not "What everyone should do".

Thanks Tim and ALNM. I don't mean to say I'm losing any sleep over it, and I doubt Jack is, either, or I sure hope not.

To me an online conversation is (or can be) as important as an in-person one, and how we treat each other, what we say to each other and how we say it - especially since we all choose to be here, we're not forced to interact with each other - is worth reflecting on.

To me an online conversation is (or can be) as important as an in-person one, and how we treat each other, what we say to each other and how we say it - especially since we all choose to be here, we're not forced to interact with each other - is worth reflecting on.

True.

I think it's worth pointing out why I have such a jaded view of internets arguing - I don't think I've ever seen a successful argument online where something actually gets resolved.

It always seems like the argument starts and people just take a point and argue the hell out of it back and forth until everyone is too exhausted to continue. I've taken a part these arguments, and the silver lining of them is that I have come out of those experiences with the wherewithal to at least be able to recognize someone else's perspective and to be able to try and look at it from that side.

So I guess what I'm trying to say is that I'm awesome. End of story. w00t!

i remember when i used to play whiffle ball, my wrist used to click after i would hit a HR into Paul Revere's house, as we used to play right across from it in north square. I found that getting a slush after every game helped rehab my clicking wrist.

Ehh, I really couldn't care less what anyone else does. Personally, I prefer to shut the hell up and enjoy the baseball games without fighting with other posters about (what I perceive to be) insignificant crap.

Tim: Fair enough, but I have rules here so we can maintain some sense of order. The first rule is to refrain from personal attacks and name-calling.

As I showed above, Jack has broken that rule. But he is not alone. I think several of us, including me, have done the same thing recently.

When I've mentioned stuff like this to L in the past, and talking about what I should or should not allow, she has said I'm overreacting to a lot of it. Maybe I am. But I'd rather be too strict than let some shit seep through.

I just talked to my dad on the phone for the first time post-Manny. He asked how I felt about it. He mentioned he was really upset at the 'Manny who?' signs, saying, "Manny was the most exciting thing in Fenway for a real long time until Ortiz came, then we had two" then "I mean what, 200 home runs, and 800 ribies?" then "I would give him a standing-o if he came back".

I was proud of my dad at that moment. He's followed the sox for more than twice as long as I've been alive and he understands where respect is due. I'm getting teary eyed.

i remember when i first started posting here, and i broke some rules (IMAGINE THAT). redsock called me out on it, ONCE. i've respected this blog ever since. i hope more people would show the same courtesy.

It always seems like the argument starts and people just take a point and argue the hell out of it back and forth until everyone is too exhausted to continue.

As long as it does not devolve into screaming at each other in all CAPS and hurling insults, "arguing the hell" out of a topic is usually fine.

It is rare that someone is won over to one side or the other, but readers may learn a thing or two about a subject they were not familiar with. I like to think that my stated standards for the blog weed out obvious morons and the people who choose to comment know they have to (and are able to) conduct themselves as adults.

With the blog format, though, discussions generally do not drag on too long. At JoS, new posts go up, new games are played, the older post drops down and into the archives. Even with the option of having new comment emailed to you (so you do not have to go back and recheck old posts), we always move on.

A little while ago, someone mentioned in a game thread that when he had first posted, I snapped/yelled at him for something. Since this guy was now a long-time commenter, I felt a little strange about that. Maybe it was you. Or Joe Grav. Either way, I guess it's good I have no memory of who or what it was about.

I think if the blog wasn't managed with an iron fist of sorts, it would get out of hand and the quality would deteriorate. It's managed fine by me. It's not like the comments take days to go through, and the prerequisite for posting is something, I think, is pretty basic. You have to be mature and not an idiot. Wow. We're so elitist.

It's what sets JoS apart from the likes of this. The second comment on there is priceless. To that I say "WTF"

Oh you have no idea. This is one of those courses where everyone goes into the exam with a 95 and comes out with a 70. I'm going to get destroyed, and I have no motivation to study. Worst. combo. ever.

think everyone who is new tends to test the boundaries to see what is appropriate in here.

I think it is more people simply acting the same way they act at other blogs or boards rather than testing boundaries. They may not know that there *are* boundaries here.

You ever look at the comments at a general baseball chat site or the comments at some of the Daily News articles I have linked to? OMG - everyone has a single digit IQ and they are all screaming at once.

I don't think there's much danger on JoS of extended, heated arguments where people get into shouting matches. That's pretty rare in these parts.

For various reasons - the season moving forward, the blog format, how Allan has chosen to run the blog, the controls we both keep on trolls, etc. - JoS leans more towards an exchange of ideas than pointless debates. Usually when people around here disagree, they just disagree. They each state their opinion, they kick it around a bit, and they move on. Even when we vehemently disagree in a game thread, we're always friends by the end of the night.

The current situation has a history, and it's likely that history is coming around again, as those dynamics tend to do.

I know some people dislike any and all confrontation, and believe the best thing to do is just let everything go. Works for others, doesn't work for me. I like to deal with things directly, in the open. It's just how I am.

As for Ortiz and the Clicking, I'm not as concerned if its just clicking (jeez I have things clicking all the time), the question I want to know is it hurting? Clicking with no pain I think he can overcome, clicking with pain starts that emotional loop of expecting the pain etc.

seems like ortiz has a lot to worry about. im sure the manny trade is in his head on a LOT of different levels.along wiht the clicking he's worried about, plus the added pressure that "he's the guy" now. not having manny there to help with the friendly competition might be fucking with him a bit.

s1c & alnm, it doesnt matter. minaya LOVES manny, the mets have the money and they NEED a corner outfielder that can hit. if they offer him the money, they wont be too concerned about his knee, and im sure neither will manny. have you seen the recent deals the mets have made? its a hotbed of injured prone has beens (not that manny is that). that being said, yes the DH is more likely. but you cant help but think the mets are ready to make a move like that. having a new stadium and all, can you image the big deal that would be made signing manny?

nixon33 said... s1c & alnm, it doesnt matter. minaya LOVES manny, the mets have the money and they NEED a corner outfielder that can hit.

If minaya loved him so much , where were they at the trade deadline.2 prospects thats all it cost the dodgers, he made no play.

I'm suprised about the click , I watched him last night warm-up on deck and it seems he is more violent with that weighted bat than he has to be....He just needs a blast , to get it out of his head..he's pressin'

RS: I'll keep this short, or at least, shorter than it might be. I did not intend to abandon the field; I wanted to answer the question that was asked (honestly)without having to wade into the Manny controversy again. I obviously failed.

When I had the horrible taste to question whether Manny's famous high-five was as admirable as most here seemed to think, and suggested that it showed a troubling lack of professionalism, I was accused of sounding like an old man yelling at kids to get off the lawn. That was a personal insult based on analysis that was unpopular. As it happens, I was RIGHT: it WAS a bad sign. When I dared to venture the opinion, based on watching the damn thing over and over, that Manny intentionally sat by while Rivera struck him out on three pitches, I got a lengthy diatribe from L-Girl about how she was "sick" of my "lectures" and that I was descending into self-parody. Nobody knows what really happened, obviously. But subsequent events suggest that it was a comment that warrented a little more respect and a little less abuse.

The JOS attitude toward Manny Ramirez has always puzzled me, and still does. Your essay about gratitude was illuminating and well-stated, but it is not fun to try to raise perfectly reasonable points when those who find Ramirez's conduct in this whole matter deplorable and unprofessional are constantly attacked as "ingrates,' "racist," "sheep," "morons," and similar name-calling. A completely even-handed comment by me that was not pro-Manny was brushed off with a personally offensive innuendo about "Jack being Jack," as if my point of view was proof of some kind of disability (as I personally believe "Manny Being Manny" is, by the way)when it isn't even a minority point of view. And that kind of response, and it is not isolated and not atypical, is mean-spirited and "snarky," yes.

And yes---I plead guilty to writing the Remy comment and not following it up. One reason was that it was a particularly hectic day---the other was that I felt the anti-Remy diatribe was both emotional and unfair and would be defended with more personal nastiness. (I just today heard the enraptured Dodger broadcasters exult over how "entertaining" Manny is.) Ultimately, I decided to try to avoid the Ramirez matter, especially after the sarcastic comment about Drew "disrespecting the game." But that was the comment that provoked the "cult" analysis. Because it seems there really are people here who are encouraged to believe that Manny never intended to beg off of a game, wasn't using his playing time as some kind of protest, and that anyone who says he wasn't trying his damndest to win above all else is part of a conspiracy. I think that's irrational and in clear defiance of what we know and have observed, as wrong as the Flat Earth Society. I knew that tag wouldn't make you happy, but my objective wasn't that. It was to try to plead for some proportion and reality where Manny was concerned. I write to others in the baseball journalism world on this topic, and ask "Am I crazy?" and they say, "Of course not! You're right on target." I give the same opinion here, and get "You're old, deluded and gullible" "Please get over whatever your problem is." Over and over again. So I haven't been rushing to read what new attacks my comments attracted. Forgive me, please. It's not fun trying to make a considered point and get sneers in return, and this blog is supposed to be fun. I'm through writing and talking and arguing about Manny Ramirez, and I can't wait until JOS is too. It's a terrific blog on just about every other topic.

Some of the insults thrown in your direction were out of bounds and for whichever ones I used, I apologize.

One note: Your claim of being told "Please get over whatever your problem is" in response to your Manny posts is incorrect. When I said those words today, I was referring to your nastiness and name-calling -- insults that were well out of proportion to the debate at hand. And totally gratuitous.

By the way, you did not address any of the insults I quoted back to you. I wish you had. They were totally out of line and I hope not to have to deal with anything like that again (from anyone). (You complain about hearing the word "sheep" in response to your opinion, yet you say we are under mass-hypnosis and exhibiitng cult-like behaviour.)

Your opinions are valid and they should be heard. But if they are delivered (amid insults) in a tone of "I'm the ultimate authority on this matter and you are all idiots", you are unlikely to find a sympathetic ear when you get annoyed. Add in saying people who disagree with you are under some kind of mind control or group think and you are going to piss off everyone around you. As I said a few days ago, respect is a two-way street.

Even in this last post, you say you were proved RIGHT by subsequent events while also admitting "Nobody knows what really happened, obviously."

I decided to try to avoid the Ramirez matter, especially after the sarcastic comment about Drew "disrespecting the game." But that was the comment that provoked the "cult" analysis.

That comment -- which was mine -- was not directed at you. It was not directed at any one person. It was directed at the idiot media whose writing indicates they think (in this case) everyone else in baseball gives 100% all the time and only Manny is lazy. So ... when Lowell takes a day off -- we say AH-HA, he's clearly faking an injury. We watch Ellsbury look at strike 3 -- why is he tanking? Trade him!

I'm always finding fault with the media, as you know and generally approve of, so when I (or someone else) makes wisecracks that mock their general viewpoint, I'm not sure why you think they are being directed at you. You are not the only person here who has expressed views about Manny. (Though if you thought they were, no wonder you are pissed off.)

Disagreement with someone is not a personal attack. It's a difference of opinion and if presented civilly, nothing more. We should be able to disagree on things here without anyone feeling personally attacked.

Having the mainstream sports media (even the good ones) agree with your opinion holds little water here.

I have been in the minority on many topics my entire life (politics, religion, sports, music) -- I do not put much stock in the majority vs minority argument. I think it's worthless. As with books, music, movies, art and a thousand other things, popularity does not necessarily equal quality. And being in the majority does not automatically make you right.

Jack, I had no idea that my comments re "hey you kids get off my lawn" and self-parody would be received the way they were. The first is something we throw around a lot on JoS, so it never occured to me that it would be heard as an insult. The second was coming from a place of irritation and annoyance, which, on reflection, I realize I should have let pass before writing.

I apologize for both remarks. I didn't intend to attack you, and I'm sorry that I did, however inadvertantly.

Separate from that, and not to negate it in any way, perhaps you do not realize that many of your posts come across as condescending, as if you are bringing wisdom from on high. You might not even realize you do this. Perhaps you feel "I'm just stating my opinion, why is everyone getting so annoyed"? While to other people it seems as if you are stating your opinion as Fact, and anyone who disagrees with it is therefore ignorant or misguided.

It effectively shuts down discussion and turns it into a lecture. It's hard to take. If your response (even to yourself) is, who cares what you think, if you don't like it, don't read it, then so be it. Perhaps, however, you will see this as an opportunity for better communication.

While I understand you felt slighted, I also feel you were extremely insulting. I don't know if your insults were directed at me specifically, or at JoS readers at large. Either way, the bits Allan quoted (cult, delusional, etc.) above were way out of line.

As I've said elsewhere (which you ignored), two people can see the exact same facts and still reach completely opposite conclusions. You obviously know this. Your opinion is not different than mine because you know better or are better informed, necessarily. Nor does the fact that my mind remains unchanged mean it is closed - any more than yours is.

I'm apologizing to you because you deserve it, because I offended you, and because I should have kept my characterizations of you out of my comment.

But I'm equally irritated and offended by your characterizations and your nastiness. Your last few comments seemed to come from out of nowhere, unprovoked, simply mocking people because they disagree with you.